I wasn't aware that Obama promised to not accept campaign contributions and was going to seek re-election without doing so. Politicians have to raise money. Period. Even Obama said this during the campaign. If you don't raise money you won't stay in office unless you're an extreme anomaly. People need to stop acting surprised about this, yes we have a terrible system and in most European countries a lot of these things would probably count as electoral fraud but we already knew this and it's not about to change. Frankly, pretending to be shocked is f***ing stupid. Changing this fact would require a constitutional amendment.

The campaign contributions weren't the thing he promised to do away with...

k, nothing to do with my point though. They watch movies, bowl, and play golf with the president. The horrors of our corrupt system of democracy!

Again, then don't promise differently when you are running for President. Everyone who dared question these type of statements was mocked during the election cycle. Now that these stupid promises are getting broken, we get mocked for mentioning them.

Again, then don't promise differently when you are running for President. Everyone who dared question these type of statements was mocked during the election cycle. Now that these stupid promises are getting broken, we get mocked for mentioning them.

This is not a broken promise of any kind. You are directing your ire in the wrong place.

Am I the only one who remembers that people weren't going to be able to buy access to the White House?

No but you're making up your own definition of what that means and going with your own expectations of what could be reasonably accomplished (which, somewhat predictably, is an impossible standard). There is absolutely no way possible for any politician to completely ignore their donors, and example the article I mentioned brought up is 100% legal. As long as we're not talking about a flat-out quid pro quo, which is probably illegal, there really isn't a problem. I'm not going to waste my time getting indignant about it and I'll save that for when Obama actually does f*** up or tell a bald-faced lie and in the meantime I'm going mock people who contribute to irrelevant arguments.

No but you're making up your own definition of what that means and going with your own expectations of what could be reasonably accomplished (which, somewhat predictably, is an impossible standard). There is absolutely no way possible for any politician to completely ignore their donors, and example the article I mentioned brought up is 100% legal. As long as we're not talking about a flat-out quid pro quo, which is probably illegal, there really isn't a problem. I'm not going to waste my time getting indignant about it and I'll save that for when Obama actually does f*** up or tell a bald-faced lie and in the meantime I'm going mock people who contribute to irrelevant arguments.

An example of him truly breaking a promise is on the "no lobbyists in the administration" thing. Another one was the telecom immunity.

Latest phony idiocy - criticizing Obama for going to Dover and being photographed while saluting the bodies (nevermind that the press is always there). What, is he supposed to do it in secret or some s***? Of all things to make a controversy over, this? For real?